{"id":244619,"date":"2010-04-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010"},"modified":"2016-05-22T00:28:02","modified_gmt":"2016-05-21T18:58:02","slug":"appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Bankim.N.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/648\/2005\t 4\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 648 of 2005\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n \n\n  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA  \n \n\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nBALVANTBHAI\nLAXMANBHAI \n\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nTHE\nSTATE OF GUJARAT \n\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMS\nSADHANA SAGAR for\nAppellant. \nMR HH PARIKH, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the State\n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 23\/04\/2010 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)<\/p>\n<p>\tBy<br \/>\npreferring this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment and<br \/>\norder rendered by the Sessions Court (FTC-10) Rajkot, in Sessions<br \/>\nCase No. 99 of 2004, on 15.2.2005, convicting him for the offence of<br \/>\nmurder of his wife Divyaben and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment<br \/>\nfor life with a fine of Rs. 500\/-, in default S.I for two months.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\ncase of the prosecution is that the alleged incident occurred on<br \/>\n3.6.2004 at about 18.30 hours when the appellant assaulted his wife<br \/>\nDivyaben with a stone and caused injuries on her head and face,<br \/>\nresulting into her death. The motive attributed is that the appellant<br \/>\nsuspected Divyaben of infidelity. It is the case of the prosecution<br \/>\nthat the appellant himself reported the incident to `A&#8217; Division<br \/>\nPolice Station, Rajkot City on the very day by lodging FIR. On the<br \/>\nbasis of the FIR, offence was registered and was investigated. After<br \/>\ninvestigation, charge sheet was filed in the Court of learned<br \/>\nJ.M.F.C.Rajkot, who, in turn, committed the case to the Court of<br \/>\nSessions, Rajkot and Sessions Case No.99\/2004 came to be registered.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tCharge<br \/>\nwas framed against the appellant at Exh.19, to which he pleaded not<br \/>\nguilty and claimed to be tried. The trial Court accepted the<br \/>\nprosecution case and convicted the appellant and sentenced him, as<br \/>\nstated in the earlier part of this judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tWe<br \/>\nhave heard learned advocate Ms.Sadhana Sagar for the appellant. She<br \/>\nsubmitted that the prosecution case depends on circumstantial<br \/>\nevidence and the prosecution has not been able to complete the chain<br \/>\nof circumstances linking the appellant with the offence. She<br \/>\nsubmitted that the trial Court has relied on the FIR (Exh.77) given<br \/>\nby the accused- appellant himself and has also relied on the<br \/>\noccurrence report recorded by the police, besides the Medico Legal<br \/>\nCase [ MLC  for short] in the hospital. The trial Court has<br \/>\noverlooked the fact that the chain is not completed and, therefore,<br \/>\nconviction could not have been recorded. It was, therefore, urged<br \/>\nthat the appeal may be allowed, the conviction may be set aside and<br \/>\nthe appellant be acquitted of the charge levelled against him.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tLearned<br \/>\nA.P.P. Mr.Parikh has opposed this appeal. According to him, the trial<br \/>\nCourt has considered all the relevant aspects of the case and has<br \/>\nthen rendered the judgment and, therefore, appellate jurisdiction may<br \/>\nnot be exercised by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tWe<br \/>\nhave examined the record and proceedings in the context of  rival<br \/>\nside submissions.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tWhat<br \/>\nemerges from the examination of the records and proceedings is that<br \/>\nthere is no direct evidence to show as to how the incident occurred.<br \/>\nThe circumstances, which are relied upon by the trial Court, are the<br \/>\nFIR (Exh.77) lodged by the first informant, copies of extract of the<br \/>\noccurrence report (Exh.58) and MLC (Exh.68). The entries (Exhs.67 &amp;\n<\/p>\n<p>68) are proved through the evidence of Ashokbhai Ramjibhai Solanki<br \/>\n(Exh.66), who was a police constable on duty at the Hospital Chowky,<br \/>\nRajkot.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tIn<br \/>\nthe first instance, the trial Court committed an error in taking into<br \/>\nconsideration the evidence in the form of FIR, which was lodged by<br \/>\nthe accused himself. In this context, decisions of the Apex Court in<br \/>\nthe cases of (1) <a href=\"\/doc\/924340\/\">Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar, AIR<\/a> 1966 SC<br \/>\n119 and (2) <a href=\"\/doc\/565474\/\">Bandlamuddi Atchuta Ramaiah &amp; Ors, vs. State of<br \/>\nAndhra Pradesh, AIR<\/a> 1997 SC 496, are relied upon. A statement<br \/>\ncontained in the FIR lodged by an accused cannot be used if it is<br \/>\ninculpatory in nature, nor can it be used for the purpose of<br \/>\ncorroboration or contradiction, unless its maker offers himself as a<br \/>\nwitness in the trial. The very limited use of it is as an admission<br \/>\nunder Section 21 of the Evidence Act against its maker alone unless<br \/>\nthe admission does not amount to confession. The trial Court,<br \/>\ntherefore, committed an error in relying upon the FIR (Exh.77) and<br \/>\nthe circumstances emerging therefrom that the appellant was with the<br \/>\ndeceased at the time of the incident.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.1\t\tBarring<br \/>\nthe above piece of evidence, there is no iota of evidence to show<br \/>\nthat the appellant was with the deceased at the relevant point of<br \/>\ntime.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tThe<br \/>\nevidence in the form of deposition of Ashokbhai Ramjibhai Solanki<br \/>\n(Exh.66) would indicate that deceased Divyaben was brought to the<br \/>\nhospital by Hasmukhbhai Laxmanbhai and history of assault on her by<br \/>\nher husband,  on account of domestic disputes, was given by him. The<br \/>\nrequisite entry at Exh.67 is in the MLC Register of Rajkot Civil<br \/>\nHospital and Exh.68 is again extract of MLC Register of the hospital<br \/>\non account of death of the deceased.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tExhs.58<br \/>\n&amp; 60 are again entries of occurrence report made in the Rajkot<br \/>\nCity &#8216;A&#8217; Division Police Station in respect of the deceased being<br \/>\nbrought to the hospital and then the deceased dying in the hospital,<br \/>\nwhich again reiterate the factum of assault by the husband. These<br \/>\npieces of evidence do not indicate the source of knowledge regarding<br \/>\nthe fact that the deceased was assaulted upon by the appellant.<br \/>\nHowever, an inference can be drawn that the person, who brought the<br \/>\ndeceased to the hospital, may have disclosed this fact. In this<br \/>\ncontext, the person, who brought the deceased to the hospital,<br \/>\nnamely, Hasmukhbhai Laxmanbhai, has not been examined by the<br \/>\nprosecution as a witness. It is, therefore, not possible to know as<br \/>\nto what was the source of knowledge for Hasmukhbhai to know and<br \/>\ndisclose that the deceased was assaulted upon by the appellant. This<br \/>\nis where the chain snaps.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.1\t\tAnother<br \/>\naspect that is pointed out is that the clothes worn by the appellant,<br \/>\nwhen arrested, were found to be stained with blood of the group of<br \/>\nthe deceased and the appellant had no injury on his person and,<br \/>\ntherefore, adverse inference may be drawn. It is true that find of<br \/>\nblood on the clothes of the appellant of the group of blood of the<br \/>\ndeceased is a very  relevant factor and a strong circumstance going<br \/>\nagainst the appellant. But it would be the only link in the chain of<br \/>\ncircumstances that the prosecution is able  to prove against the<br \/>\naccused. Such a circumstance in isolation cannot be used in recording<br \/>\na conviction for the offence of murder.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tThe<br \/>\ndiscovery of clothes at the instance of the accused is also a piece<br \/>\nof evidence, which does not inspire confidence, as the panch<br \/>\nwitnesses have not supported the prosecution case.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tThe<br \/>\nresultant effect is that there are only three pieces of evidence,<br \/>\nwhich can be considered as circumstances against the appellant. The<br \/>\nfirst is the extracts of MLC case papers, the second is the station<br \/>\ndiary entry and the third is find of blood on the clothes of the<br \/>\nappellant of the group of the deceased.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.1\t\tAs<br \/>\ndiscussed above, the evidence in the form of entry in MLC Register<br \/>\nand the entry in the Crime Register pale into insignificance, as the<br \/>\nsource of knowledge, namely, Hasmukhbhai, is not examined. That<br \/>\nleaves behind  the only circumstance, viz., find of blood on the<br \/>\nclothes of the appellant of the group of blood of the deceased, but<br \/>\nthat by itself cannot be considered as sufficient evidence, even in<br \/>\nisolation, to record conviction. The circumstances, which are sought<br \/>\nto be relied upon for fastening criminal liability on the appellant,<br \/>\nare not fully established.  The trial Court has founded conviction on<br \/>\na very facile piece of evidence and, therefore, it cannot be<br \/>\nsustained. The appeal, therefore, deserves to be allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\tThe<br \/>\nappeal is allowed. The conviction recorded and sentence awarded by<br \/>\nthe learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-10, Rajkot, in Sessions<br \/>\nCase No. 99\/2004, by judgment and order dated 15.2.2005 is hereby set<br \/>\naside and the appellant (Balvantbhai Laxmanbhai Ratnotar) is<br \/>\nacquitted of the charge levelled against him. He be set at liberty<br \/>\nforthwith, if not required in any other case. Fine paid, if any, be<br \/>\nrefunded to him. Muddamal be disposed of as directed by the trial<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[A.L.Dave,J.]<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[Bankim<br \/>\nN.Mehta,J.]<\/p>\n<p>(patel)<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010 Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Bankim.N.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/648\/2005 4\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 648 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-244619","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-04-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-21T18:58:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-21T18:58:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1349,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010\",\"name\":\"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-21T18:58:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-21T18:58:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-21T18:58:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010"},"wordCount":1349,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010","name":"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-21T18:58:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-23-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Appearance vs Unknown on 23 April, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244619","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=244619"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244619\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244619"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244619"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244619"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}